Acrylamides

"Ray Audette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As I mention in my book, grains were the first known carcinogen. In
1843 it was discovered at The U of Paris Medical School that
epidemological cancer rates mirrored per-capita grain consumption
everywhere such data was available. The relationship between grain
and cancer was thus 120 years more mathmatically obvious than that of
cancer and tobacco.

Well, I don't know about that.

I do tend to think of a slice of bread about equal to a spoonful of sugar.
I think of a potato as about equal to several spoons of sugar. I think of a
cup of rice as about half a cup of sugar.

I don't think about the cancer relationship. Everyone can find an argument
to provide support for one or another cancer study. All I get is, if you
don't eat or do anything, you might not get cancer.

I won't eat bread or potatoes anymore, much, and that's okay. I don't miss
them.

It's a simple thing. If you seriously go into low-carb, you'll get a desire
for fresh veggies, and not for bread or other related products.

Your body doesn't know the difference between a spoonful of sugar or starch.
It all ends up being the same.
was only discovered in Sweden when in 2002 foods

Quoted message said:

were tested for acrylamides. Levels in bread were found to exceed
those considered a cancer risk by 300 times.

This makes a single slice of bread a far more likely source of cancer
than a cigarette. It is also the first known discovery of a
carcinogen that predicts epidemological cancer rates ( again). All
other known causes of cancer are but mere statistical noise in
comparison.

Acrylamides are also found in potato products, french fried potatoes
being even worse than bread.

When can we expect warning label, such as found on cigarette packs, on
such products? When can we expect full disclosure from Frito-Lay and
other multi-nationals about the testing they're doing now on
acrylamides?

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

Aren't these acrylamides also found in some nuts, like almonds?

Ray Audette wrote:
:: As I mention in my book, grains were the first known carcinogen. In
:: 1843 it was discovered at The U of Paris Medical School that
:: epidemological cancer rates mirrored per-capita grain consumption
:: everywhere such data was available. The relationship between grain
:: and cancer was thus 120 years more mathmatically obvious than that of
:: cancer and tobacco.
::
:: The reason for this was only discovered in Sweden when in 2002 foods
:: were tested for acrylamides. Levels in bread were found to exceed
:: those considered a cancer risk by 300 times.
::
:: This makes a single slice of bread a far more likely source of cancer
:: than a cigarette. It is also the first known discovery of a
:: carcinogen that predicts epidemological cancer rates ( again). All
:: other known causes of cancer are but mere statistical noise in
:: comparison.
::
:: Acrylamides are also found in potato products, french fried potatoes
:: being even worse than bread.
::
:: When can we expect warning label, such as found on cigarette packs,
:: on such products? When can we expect full disclosure from Frito-Lay
:: and other multi-nationals about the testing they're doing now on
:: acrylamides?
::
:: Ray Audette
:: Author "NeanderThin"
:: www.NeanderThin.com

x-no-archive: yes

Quoted message said:

The reason for this was only discovered in Sweden when in 2002 foods
were tested for acrylamides. Levels in bread were found to exceed
those considered a cancer risk by 300 times.

I'd love to see the publication cites for these, if possible.

Interestingly, in the Harvard nurses' study, breast cancer was most frequent in
the high starch consumption group, while high fat conferred no such risk, and
low fat wasn't at all protective. Higher blood glucose (and insulin) is
associated with increased risk of ovarian cancer.

Susan

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Aren't these acrylamides also found in some nuts, like almonds?

In almonds that have been roasted yes but still nowhere near as much
as bread or potato products.

Acrylamides are the largest cancer source ever found. Vilhjalmur
Stefanssons book "Cancer Disease of Civilization" goes into great
detail about the search for cancer among hunter-gathers over a hundred
year period - none was ever found even though most studied were heavy
smokers from an early age and were exposed to continious wood-smoke (
far more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke).
[ BTW Stefansson's book "The Fat of the Land" may be the ultimate
low-carb book]

No other known carcinogenic sources can explain our current cancer
rates. The numbers correlate to the know effects of acrlyamides in the
amounts recently discovered.

I also know that if you mention it to a Frito-Lay scientist (as I did
recently) they get kinda pale. You can almost see their stock options
falling in their mind's eye.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

Ray Audette wrote:
|| "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|| news:<[email hidden]>...
||| Aren't these acrylamides also found in some nuts, like almonds?
|||
|| In almonds that have been roasted yes but still nowhere near as much
|| as bread or potato products.
||
|| Acrylamides are the largest cancer source ever found. Vilhjalmur
|| Stefanssons book "Cancer Disease of Civilization" goes into great
|| detail about the search for cancer among hunter-gathers over a
|| hundred
|| year period - none was ever found even though most studied were heavy
|| smokers from an early age and were exposed to continious wood-smoke (
|| far more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke).
|| [ BTW Stefansson's book "The Fat of the Land" may be the ultimate
|| low-carb book]
||
|| No other known carcinogenic sources can explain our current cancer
|| rates. The numbers correlate to the know effects of acrlyamides in
|| the
|| amounts recently discovered.
||
|| I also know that if you mention it to a Frito-Lay scientist (as I did
|| recently) they get kinda pale. You can almost see their stock
|| options
|| falling in their mind's eye.

Thanks, Ray....Stefansson's books are on my list.

x-no-archive: yes

Quoted message said:

Acrylamides are the largest cancer source ever found. Vilhjalmur
Stefanssons book "Cancer Disease of Civilization" goes into great
detail about the search for cancer among hunter-gathers over a hundred
year period - none was ever found even though most studied were heavy
smokers from an early age and were exposed to continious wood-smoke (
far more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke).
[ BTW Stefansson's book "The Fat of the Land" may be the ultimate
low-carb book]

No other known carcinogenic sources can explain our current cancer
rates.

The numbers correlate to the know effects of acrlyamides in the

Quoted message said:

amounts recently discovered.

I also know that if you mention it to a Frito-Lay scientist (as I did
recently) they get kinda pale. You can almost see their stock options
falling in their mind's eye.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

Not to be a nag, but those are very strong assertions, ones I'm willing to
believe, and I've even posted some correlative cites, but do you have any to
share, ones that support the assertions above?

If so, I'd really like to add them to my collection.

TIA,

Susan

Is there any evidence indicating the effect is cumulative? I'm wondering if
my having stopped eating grains at the age of 47 might have been too late.

Are there any studies, of those who have switched to paleo, showing cancer
rates?

(I bought your book, but haven't read it yet.)

Cubit

"Ray Audette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Aren't these acrylamides also found in some nuts, like almonds?

In almonds that have been roasted yes but still nowhere near as much
as bread or potato products.

Acrylamides are the largest cancer source ever found. Vilhjalmur
Stefanssons book "Cancer Disease of Civilization" goes into great
detail about the search for cancer among hunter-gathers over a hundred
year period - none was ever found even though most studied were heavy
smokers from an early age and were exposed to continious wood-smoke (
far more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke).
[ BTW Stefansson's book "The Fat of the Land" may be the ultimate
low-carb book]

No other known carcinogenic sources can explain our current cancer
rates. The numbers correlate to the know effects of acrlyamides in the
amounts recently discovered.

I also know that if you mention it to a Frito-Lay scientist (as I did
recently) they get kinda pale. You can almost see their stock options
falling in their mind's eye.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

Am Thu said:

(I bought your book, but haven't read it yet.)

read it. it's about one of the best I've ever read and it makes helluva lot
of sense. (thank you Ray, from Hamburg, Germany).

Petra

I found an article about studies suggesting Acrylamides might not be so
dangerous.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/5xyt5

Maybe the question is how "high" the Acrylamide was in the animal studies,
that showed a cancer link, as compared to the human dietary levels in the
studies in the above article.

Cubit

"Ray Audette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As I mention in my book, grains were the first known carcinogen. In
1843 it was discovered at The U of Paris Medical School that
epidemological cancer rates mirrored per-capita grain consumption
everywhere such data was available. The relationship between grain
and cancer was thus 120 years more mathmatically obvious than that of
cancer and tobacco.

The reason for this was only discovered in Sweden when in 2002 foods
were tested for acrylamides. Levels in bread were found to exceed
those considered a cancer risk by 300 times.

This makes a single slice of bread a far more likely source of cancer
than a cigarette. It is also the first known discovery of a
carcinogen that predicts epidemological cancer rates ( again). All
other known causes of cancer are but mere statistical noise in
comparison.

Acrylamides are also found in potato products, french fried potatoes
being even worse than bread.

When can we expect warning label, such as found on cigarette packs, on
such products? When can we expect full disclosure from Frito-Lay and
other multi-nationals about the testing they're doing now on
acrylamides?

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I found an article about studies suggesting Acrylamides might not be so
dangerous.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/5xyt5

Maybe the question is how "high" the Acrylamide was in the animal studies,
that showed a cancer link, as compared to the human dietary levels in the
studies in the above article.

Both the U.S. and the E.U. use variations of the Ames test (see
bibliography at web site). Acrylamides at 20 parts per billion yield
an acceptable level of 1 case of cancer per million exposures. Bread
was found to contain 300 times that amount. You need a special permit
to buy a pesticide with that amount of cancer risk.

Today on the TV news there was a story linking carbohydrates to breast
cancer
( a risk first found by Italian scientists several years ago). I will
to find a link for you.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I found an article about studies suggesting Acrylamides might not be so
dangerous.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/5xyt5

Maybe the question is how "high" the Acrylamide was in the animal studies,
that showed a cancer link, as compared to the human dietary levels in the
studies in the above article.

Both the U.S. and the E.U. use variations of the Ames test (see
bibliography at web site). Acrylamides at 20 parts per billion yield
an acceptable level of 1 case of cancer per million exposures. Bread
was found to contain 300 times that amount. You need a special permit
to buy a pesticide with that amount of cancer risk.

Today on the TV news there was a story linking carbohydrates to breast
cancer
( a risk first found by Italian scientists several years ago). I will
to find a link for you.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com

x-no-archive: yes

Quoted message said:

Today on the TV news there was a story linking carbohydrates to breast
cancer
( a risk first found by Italian scientists several years ago). I will
to find a link for you.

Yes, but the link between elevated glucose levels and starch eating and breast
cancer have been found before, without consideration of acrylamide levels.

Ray, are you ever going to post some scientific cites for the assertions you
made regarding acrylamides and the cancers they cause?

You keep ignoring the request, which makes me believe you haven't any such
information, beyond speculation, that it's the acrylamide rather than the rise
in glucose level that leads to cancers.

Susan

20 parts per billion is incredibly small. I found the Ames bibliography and
Googled, but all I could glean was that these are standard rat studies.
That's good enough for me.

I saw the recent article about the Mexican study linking carbs to cancer.

It occurs to me that in the Swedish studies the non-acrylamide group may
still have acrylamide, but at a lower level. How could they find people
with no exposure? Also, maybe the other common carcinogens create too much
"noise" in the data.

"Ray Audette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I found an article about studies suggesting Acrylamides might not be so
dangerous.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/5xyt5

Maybe the question is how "high" the Acrylamide was in the animal

studies,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that showed a cancer link, as compared to the human dietary levels in

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

studies in the above article.

Both the U.S. and the E.U. use variations of the Ames test (see
bibliography at web site). Acrylamides at 20 parts per billion yield
an acceptable level of 1 case of cancer per million exposures. Bread
was found to contain 300 times that amount. You need a special permit
to buy a pesticide with that amount of cancer risk.

Today on the TV news there was a story linking carbohydrates to breast
cancer
( a risk first found by Italian scientists several years ago). I will
to find a link for you.

Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
www.NeanderThin.com